Business Law Study Material with Solved Assignments and Essays - Desklib

This study material covers various topics related to Business Law including landlord's right of entry, tenant's rights, and possession of property. It also includes relevant sections of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2004. The study material is suitable for Business Law students and includes solved assignments and essays. Course code, course name, and college/university are not mentioned.

Running head: BUSINESS LAW
BUSINESS LAW
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1BUSINESS LAW
Question 1
Issue
In this scenario the issue is to be ascertained is if the landlord has a right of entry in such
cases and any recourse available to the landlord in case of damage to the property.
Rule
The Residential Tenancy Act, 2004 states at Section 23 defines a landlord’s right of entry
to a leasehold property. This section states that a landlord’s right of entry is confined to two
methods. The first is that the landlord may serve 24 hour notice on the tenant and subsequently
enter the property after the notice period. On the other hand, the landlord may also communicate
with the tenant and obtain his consent and subsequently agree upon a time where he may enter to
inspect the property (Black & Stafford, 2013). The tenant enters into a covenant where he must
ensure that no damage is done to the leasehold property. Section 21 of the Residential Tenancy
Act, 2004 envisages this and prescribes that in case the tenant or any other person does damage
the property within the lease period then as per Section 30 (1) of the act the landlord may file an
application in court and serve the tenant with a 24 hour termination notice (Clarke, 2017).
Application
As envisaged in Section 23 of the Residential Tenancy Act, 2004 the landlord in this case
would have the right to enter the leasehold property in the ways provided in the act. Further if the
landlord finds any sort of damage to the property caused by the tenant he would have the right to
apply to court and subsequently serve the tenant with a termination notice.

2BUSINESS LAW
Conclusion
To conclude the landlord would have the right to enter the property as prescribed by the
provisions of the act. Additionally the landlord would have statutory remedies available in case
of any damage caused to the property.
Question 2
Issue
The issue here is to determine the rights available to the tenant and to determine if the
tenant has any recourse in light of the given issue.
Rule
Section 16 of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2004 when leasing out a piece of property
the landlord must ensure that the property being leased adheres to the minimum standards
prescribed by a variety of acts within the jurisdiction of Alberta (Buckwold, 2017). As envisaged
by Section 16 this is a statutory duty of the4 landlord. In case of a breach of such a duty the
tenant would have the remedy prescribed under Section 37 (1) (a) and (c) of the act. This
empowers the tenant to apply to court for compensation for breach of such a duty and recovery
of costs for undertaking the landlord’s duty (Oertel, 2016).
Application
In the given case the leasehold property would not meet the requirements of Section 16
and thus the tenant would be able to apply to court for compensation. Additionally if the tenant is
made to shovel the property himself he can recover costs for the same under Section 37 (1) (C).

3BUSINESS LAW
Conclusion
The tenant would have rights to apply to court for compensation for the property not
meeting the minimum standards and additionally would be able to incur costs for undertaking the
landlord’s obligation.
Question 3
Issue
The issue here is to determine the rights of the tenant in case of not getting possession of
the property.
Rule
As prescribed by the provisions of Section 16 (a) of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2004
the landlord is obliged to make the leasehold property available to the tenant before the
commencement of the tenancy. In such a case Section 38 of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2004
provides a remedy to the tenant in the form of repudiation of the contract, recovery of damages
and special damages in case the breach was foreseeable by the landlord (Wolf, 2013).
Application
In the given set of facts and circumstances the landlord did not make the leasehold
property available to the tenant. Moreover since an agreement had been entered into he could
foresee the resulting breach. Thus he was in breach of his covenants under Section 16 (a) of the
Residential Tenancies Act, 2004. In this case the tenant would have the right to remedies under
Section 38 of the act including special damages as this was a foreseeable breach.

4BUSINESS LAW
Conclusion
To conclude the tenant would have the right to get possession of the property, in case he
does not he would have remedies available to him under the act.

5BUSINESS LAW
Reference list
Black, J., & Stafford, D. (2013). Housing policy and finance. Routledge.
Buckwold, T. M. (2017). The Reform of Judgment Enforcement Law in Canada: An Overview
and Comparison of Models for Reform. Sask. L. Rev., 80, 71.
Clarke, D. (2017). Home Court Advantage: Evidence from an Unusual Landlord-Tenant Reform
in Canada.
Oertel, C. Y. (2016). The Tenancy Law Reform Act of 2001 and the Risk Perception of
Residential Real Estate Investments. In Impact of Public Policy Measures on the German
Real Estate Market (pp. 34-56). Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden.
Residential Tenancies Act, 2004.
Wolf, M. A. (2013). Powell on Real Property.